[Editor’s Note: The Voice of Liberty Podcast welcomes a new blogger to its ranks today – Christa McJunkin (full disclosure, she’s John McJunkin’s wife.)  She’s a former liberal who has converted to conservatism, and has a lot of great things to say.  Enjoy her thought-provoking posts!]



It struck me today that there is a very real difference between the Republicans and the Democrats in this election season.  I know – MAJOR NEWSFLASH!  I’m talking about a very real difference that doesn’t get discussed, and this is it . . .

The Republican candidates have actual policy disagreements while the Democrat candidates differ on their candidacy’s narrative or how authentic their identity is.

Now that Edwards is out, the Democrats have to choose between a white woman who opposes the war in Iraq, wants universal healthcare and open borders; and a black man who opposes the war in Iraq, wants universal healthcare and open borders.  Now, I don’t see them defined as the “white woman” and the “black man.”  They do.  And the reason they do is that there is no difference between their policy positions, so the only distinctions left to make are the ones they were born with.  As has been said before, if you vote for Clinton you’re a racist and if you vote for Obama you’re a sexist.
 
Now on to the Republicans.  We are essentially left with McCain and Romney.  Admittedly, they are both white men.  More's the pity.  McCain is the white man who voted against the Bush tax cuts, not only because they weren’t accompanied by spending restraints, but because they decreased taxes on “the rich.”  He has been a reliable hawk on the war and an admirable pork-buster.  He’s also been responsible for (even the namesake of) three terrible pieces of legislation.  McCain-Feingold, despite its stated purpose, has increased the influence of money in politics and needlessly and unconstitutionally restricted free speech.  McCain-Kennedy was amnesty plain and simple and for someone from Arizona to get this issue wrong is inexplicable and inexcusable.  McCain-Lieberman is legislation that buys into the leftist deceit of global warming and proposes a solution that not only won’t have an appreciable effect on global carbon emissions, but will hobble the American economy in the process.  McCain may hold socially conservative positions, be a dependable hawk and anti-pork, but the issues that stir him to action in his 25-year career are all non-conservative.  That is troubling to say the least.
 
Romney is the other white man.  He’s the one who tacked left or stayed agnostic on social issues in order to get elected in Massachusetts.  He’s the fiscal conservative who actually understands the economy and as a successful businessman has a grasp on America’s position in the world economy.  He lacks foreign policy experience, but holds the right positions when it comes to the war, Iran, North Korea and China.  He did not address the illegal immigration issue in any serious way while Governor, but has never supported amnesty.  He cobbled together an imperfect solution to healthcare coverage in Massachusetts and while it’s not something I’d want to see nationalized, he doesn’t either.
 
I think you can see here that I am in Romney’s camp.  But notwithstanding that fact I understand that there are real differences between these two candidates.  This leads me to the conclusion that the Republicans are truly the party of ideas and not identities.  At least we have this going for us.  Unfortunately, I’m afraid that and $4.25 will get me a double-venti-latte.